Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263405AbUCPG24 (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Mar 2004 01:28:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263456AbUCPG24 (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Mar 2004 01:28:56 -0500 Received: from mail-02.iinet.net.au ([203.59.3.34]:14550 "HELO mail.iinet.net.au") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S263405AbUCPG2z (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Mar 2004 01:28:55 -0500 Message-ID: <40569E68.2040806@cyberone.com.au> Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 17:27:52 +1100 From: Nick Piggin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040122 Debian/1.6-1 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrea Arcangeli CC: Rik van Riel , Andrew Morton , marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com, j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org Subject: Re: [2.4] heavy-load under swap space shortage References: <20040315222419.GM30940@dualathlon.random> <20040315233205.GO30940@dualathlon.random> In-Reply-To: <20040315233205.GO30940@dualathlon.random> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 694 Lines: 22 Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > >I argue those scalability benefits of the locks, on a 32G machine or on >a 1G machine those locks benefits are near zero. The only significant >benefit is in terms of computational complexity of the normal-zone >allocations, where we'll only walk on the zone-normal and zone-dma >pages. > > Out of interest, are there workloads on 8 and 16-way UMA systems that have lru_lock scalability problems in 2.6? Anyone know? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/